But it's also the exact sort of thing that LLMs are literally perfect for in my experience so there's really no excuse anymore. I've never seen Claude fail to turn a 5k PR into a well-decomposed Graphite stack.

And the worst part is, I regret it. We need a greenhouse now and greenhouse prices are through the roof! I can't afford NOT to impulse buy a greenhouse at Costco 18 months ago now! I'll never make that mistake again.

What are you referring to here? The latest fad before AI was crypto, or maybe "the metaverse" and I don't think anyone credited those for layoffs. Before that, the latest large round of layoffs was during what, 2008? And the blame for that was correctly laid on the very real economic collapse occurring.

But I really don't need that quirkiness at Home Depot, the DMV or my bank (or Amazon, or government websites, or my banking site). I'm there to purchase some screws, register my car or pick up some checks. I just need a storefront (or a website) that lets me do that as fast and homogenously as possible.

99.9% of stores (and UIs) are the latter, not the former.

This is obviously untrue. Would you sell a box that spits out $1 million dollars a year for 1 million dollars?

This is the kind of understated yet thoroughly disgusting imagery an LLM couldn't come up with on its own, great example.

This was my sole experience at the one place I worked with an internal QA team. They absolutely could never find bugs that devs missed, often mis-marked ones that didn't exist, and failed to find obvious edge cases that did exist.

Multiple devs fired because the CEO believed the QA over the engineering team; if they marked a bug as present, it was the engineer's fault for writing it. If they didn't catch a bug that made it to prod, it was the engineer's fault for not including it in the test plan. They represented nothing but red tape and provided no value.

Good QA sounds great! I'd love to know what that's like someday! It'd be great to have someone testing my code and finding breakages I missed! I'm only slightly (incredibly) bitter about my bad experience with its implementation.

Most people do not want AI! Only a tiny segment of Middle Managers Looking To Leverage New Technology are actually excited by AI branding.

But, lots of people want software that does magically useful things, and LLMs can do that! Just...don't brand it as AI.

It's like branding a new computer with more processing power as "Jam Packed with Silicon and Capacitors!" instead of, "It starts up really fast!". Nobody needs to know implementation details if the thing is actually useful.

There's 5 of them, two of which happen to have been acquired by Google. Fair to say it's likely a coincidence.

Interestingly, they all use "vav vav" as the start of their Hebrew names. "Vav" is the hebrew letter for V, so it's kind of like using VV to represent W.

Maybe you're right, and it's a stylistic thing! My knowledge of Hebrew ends in Hebrew school, and that mostly focused on blessing and prayers over startup naming.

Mercor, Surge, Scale, and other data labelling firms have shown that's not true. Paid data for LLM training is in higher demand than ever for this exact reason: Model creators want to improve their models, and free data no longer cuts it.